The Sensational Sun

Following on from the previous blog post- which illustrated the willingness of a Rangers supporting journalist to subject himself to ridicule and to pass blatant disinformation off as fact- today we head into the sewers to take a look at how The Sun does it.

Our national tabloids have never been taken too seriously. However, at their best, the red-tops have used sensationalism to attract large audiences to stories involving fraud and hypocrisy among the famous and the powerful. How strange then to read this morning’s article “Whyte’s putting off AGM”. When has a down-market trash-tabloid like The Sun ever worked so hard at de-sensationalising a story? I would not argue for any paper to do anything other than print the facts, but this is The Sun. Making stories sexier than they really are has been their stock in trade for generations.

Taxes? No worries. “…Whyte has been in detailed negotiations with HMRC to sort out the problems he inherited at Ibrox”

No audit? No problem. Rangers are just waiting on a wee letter from their busy lawyer who must just be swamped with other, more serious, issues.

Losing the tax case? Relax. Andrew Thornhill QC “expected the ruling to go in Gers’ favour and the club have had no suggestion that has changed“.

Rather odd to see a tabloid working so hard to take the heat out of a scandal!

Regular readers of this blog will know that this article in The Sun is riddled with disinformation and outright fabrications. The especially astute would wonder if a Sun hack had even penned a single word of this article. It is smeared with the fingerprints and DNA of the professional PR rep. (If Rangers’ PR gurus were any good at their trade, it would be a little less obvious). This article looks like it is a straight copy & paste from an email sent by the likes of Jack Irvine.

Negotiations with HMRC? Over which of the three cases is “The Sun” article referring? The Big Case? No- Whyte did try to engage in some discussions recently but those fell flat. The Wee Case which Whyte has recently opened an application for a belated appeal (despite the bill having been previously agreed). No. I don’t think so either. Or maybe most of Whyte’s recent discussions with HMRC have been “negotiating” the fact that Rangers have not been remitting the tax which they have been withholding from players’ salaries? Yes- that could be it.

Or Andrew Thornhill’s letter from last year? Is it this one mentioned by Rangers’ board of directors internal management communications from the middle of May? (Whyte was already in charge when this internal report was prepared).

Not exactly what “The Sun” 😉 has reported. Is it? This opinion amounts to “you are up for sale, and you need me to use my lawyerly skill to provide an empty and meaningless statement that sounds promising at first blush“. It looks like for the second time in a week, Rangers’ PR reps have been feeding untruths and disinformation to their friends in the media. In the case of The Telegraph’s Roddy Forsyth and The Sun’s Iain King, both have well known loyalties to Rangers.

Whether it is lack of intelligence, an absence of professional pride, or both that makes these journalists serve as willing channels for PR-guff does not really matter. The sad part is that even with the exposure of the failure of so many hacks to defend their beloved club from fraudsters and charlatans, they are still willing to wag their tails and wait for some scraps of succulent lamb to be thrown from their master’s table. Have they learned nothing?

If anyone was ever in any doubt as to how serious the crisis is within Scottish sports journalism, they need look no further than today’s The Sun. Not only are they hosing water on the seriousness of Rangers’ myriad legal and financial problems, but we are treated to a headline pumping the notion that Kenny Dalglish’s Liverpool are ready to make their move for Rangers’ prime sellable asset, Nikica Jelavic. Let us hope that Whyte does not fluff the negotiations like he did in the summer. Contrary to the comical hype of the time, it is well accepted within Ibrox that not a single formal offer was received for Jelavic. A telephone enquiry was made by Leicester and a price of about £6m was discussed. However, Leicester did not follow through with an actual binding offer. At the time, it seemed that if Rangers FC were content to inflame the rage of HMRC staff with talk of being in a position to reject such princely sums, then it was not my job to intervene!

Whether Dalglish has any interest in Jelavic or not, I have no idea. What is clear is that Rangers are pulling in their markers in a big way to generate favourable press just now. Any sensible observer would be entitled to wonder why it is so important now.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

About rangerstaxcaseI have information on Rangers' tax case, and I will use this blog to provide the details of what Rangers FC have done, why it was illegal, and what the implications for what was (updated) one of the largest football clubs in Britain.

950 Responses to The Sensational Sun

But did you have resort to the razor before you retired as leader of the Spanish Inquisition? I agree entirely about the absurdity of the suggestions by veritas and others, which you will note I dealt with, also 3 pages back.

ClydesdaleBhoy says:
12/12/2011 at 2:00 pm
Hugh McEwan 8.40am
No i dont think they will win the big case but what i didnt understand was,

What Gwared12.36am said about the 25% of debt and HMRC can say no to admim

I cant get my head round no ibrox as there have been Portsmouth,Leeds, Dundee, and Livi and they are all still in their home grounds even after all their problems
=============================

In order for a CVA to be agreed 75% of the creditors (by debt level) must agree it. In the past HMRC have had less than the 25% they need. In Portsmouth’s case it was about 22% and that was only because the administrator refused part of their claim. HMRC even took the administrator to Court to try to reverse that and get them the 25% they needed to block the CVA,

This isnstance is even more complex. If as is expected Wavetower uses a receiver to get their money, then they will have little or no debt left. That being the case HMRC will already have more than the 25% they need. In essense if a receiver is used then rangers are almost certainly going to be wound up.

If there is anything left after the receiver then HMRC will have it sold off to get them what they can, a CVA makes no sense for them as they will get everything anyway, so why agree a lesser amount.

Lurker from the begining, the level and quality of this site is outstanding (apart from the odd bit of nonsense when things are quiet). I usually never have anything germain to contribute which is a good reason to keep quiet. For what it’s worth I did get some extremely strong info that MBB had offered 25 thousand to on Friday to settle the Tixeay case and this was knocked back.

ClydesdaleBhoy says:
12/12/2011 at 2:04 pm
Hugh McEwan 11.00am
I am a bit lost when you start talking about admin, CVA, receivership
need to try and understand the differences between them ( might have to look back over the old posts again)

===========================

A receiver is put in by the floating charge holder to get them their money. In this instance it is Wavetower / Craig Whyte. The receivers job is to get him his money and that’s it, care not one jot about anyone else. Once that is done the receiver hands the company back to it’s board.

An administrator is there to try to get the creditors paid, whilst at the same time trying to keep the business running. The first person to get paid is the secured creditor (I’m ignoring wages etc) they get their money before everyone else (Wavetower). Then the money is split by debt level. So if there’s £1000 and you have 25% of the debt you get £250. The administrator makes all decisions whilst they are in charge. That includes disposing off assets, sacking people etc.

A CVA is an agreement between the administrator and the normal creditors. Asking them if they will accept a lesser amount than they are owed. The classic pennies in the pound deal. If 75% (by debt level) agree to that then it is forced on everyone. Once a CVA is paid out then debts are cleared. If there is a business left the administrator will hand it back to the owners to continue trading. That is still the original business.

I find it interesting that the amount invested by MBB in Merchant was almost the same amount as Castle Grant is valued at. Could he have secured loans to this value to invest in Merchant House.The hyper link gives a full account of the transactions by LibertyTixway/Merchant house.

/On 30 December 2009, Liberty transferred £500,000 of 10% preference shares in Tixway (the “Tixway Preference Shares”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Liberty to Merchant Capital Ltd, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. This investment holding of the Tixway Preference Shares strengthens the subsidiary’s balance sheet and capital position, which allow Merchant Capital to continue to comply with the continuing capital adequacy requirements of the Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority for the establishment of a Dublin-based UCITS fund platform. In consideration of the transfer by Liberty of the Tixway Preference Shares, the Company has issued to Liberty an unsecured convertible loan note of £500,000 carrying no interest and which shall mature in 2015 (the “Tixway Convertible Loan Notes”).

Clydesdalebhoy,
Does the Sorting Office not back onto and give access to Lanark Post Office in St Lenoard Street? in which case it will just be a postal address furthermore is there not an Accountants just done the Street next to Big Davy Flynn’s?

It was a long shot – the addresses were ringing a bell so that’s why I suggested the name. Still, we’ve found out a little more!
Tom Whyte is his dad…which brings us back to Bellshill again.

A refresher:
longtimelurker says: (quoting from cfcblog, if I remember correctly)
02/12/2011 at 6:08 pm

“………the same address in Bellshill as an office of GM Mining, a joint venture between Sir Minty Moonbeams and the feuding Gillespie brothers.
Just a few streets away were the registered addresses of several of Craig Whyte’s firms.
These guys moved in the same circles. Mining firms need plant hire. Wee Craigie and his dad supplied it.
In 1999, GM Mining were rumoured to be launching a takeover of Waverley Mining.
Instead a little-known company, Corporate Resolve (effectively controlled by Craig Whyte) launched a bid that failed dismally.
Waverley Mining Finance then became Palmaris. And their first purchase? Custom Services Group, owned by wee Craigie’s dad Tom.
Mind you, that ended in acrimony when, two years later, Palmaris attempted to sue Tom Whyte for effectively selling them a “pup”. ”

I don’t see much online about Thomas Whyte so If any of the Bellshill stuff becomes relevant enough it will have to be dug out of the local press reports at that time. I note the plant hire connection….again if I remember correctly, Whyte “sold himself’ the plant from one of his previous failures at a knock-down price, no doubt preventing the taxpayers or some other creditors from getting their dues. I also note that the Balfron Goup made fork-lift trucks and other
plant and is quite close in both location and time. Another possible link there?

The reason that popped up in my head was because I’ve just read through the Solicitors Discipinary Tribunal against Baxendale Walker and although it’s 80 pages of turgid legal arguments it was well worth a read.

The 535X (UK) LIMITED connection is where I originally thought we would find Whyte and Murray in the same room. I think they only had about twenty or so quoted companies with Rangers and Man City being two of them. (from memory so I’m happy to be put right on that)

You make an excellent point about the difficulty of visualising the world of Whyte. If anyone has any ideas about software apps that do a good job of showing related data, let us know. (I would exclude Visio – at least the out of the box version. It would be very labour intensive).

rangerstaxcase says:
12/12/2011 at 3:57 pm
If anyone has any ideas about software apps that do a good job of showing related data, let us know. (I would exclude Visio – at least the out of the box version. It would be very labour intensive).

RTC, try Open Office – Draw. It’s free and powerful. Still might not do what you need but it’s free at least.

rangerstaxcase says:
12/12/2011 at 4:19 pm
Thanks Richie Rich. That sounds like the sort of tool I had in mind. I will check it out and report back.
——————————————-
Decided to take up the challange !!!

Outstanding work people. Collectively, I say: Chapeau (or should that be Chapeaux?)

Not much gossip to be extracted from the recent court stuff, other than that Lord Hodge was apparently very very irritated at how late the deal came in McIntyre’s case and made no real attempt to disguise his displeasure at what he saw as the court being mucked about. The impression is that the Rangers side of it is being micro-managed from London and no-one up here can do anything wthout express authority from there.

Also it seems Whyte is running a mile from anything which might open up routes to recovery of incriminating documents. I understand they abandoned a material and central limb of their defence to Bain’s claim rather than allow him to seek an order for recovery of documents which would have been relevant to it.

**************************
Excellent summary, I will get someone to dig around a bit on these (BTW, Cairnhall rings a bell for some reason – not sure why, but there’s something tingling in the old grey cells). I am particularly taken with the Miami link that has been posted earlier – my guys dug up some stuff about by a week or so ago but we discounted it as the name was wrong and there wasn’t an obvious connection. We will revisit.

So let me see if I have this correct in so far as the last couple of days go:

1. It has been established that Craig Whyte is a director of a French Company which has its registered office in Grasse som 30 miles or so from Monaco and that this company is probably a title holding company which means it owns property. He is then listed as being resident as living in Monaco at an address which appears to be a complex for short term rentals in the North of the Principality.

2. There is a Florida based company which seems to have him as a Director and registered as c/o Liberty which if I recall is registered at 65 Bath Street Glasgow. It is not clear what the Florida company does as yet.

3 From the information available, there seems to, be or have been, Whyte related companies which at some point in time shared an address in Bellshill with GM Mining and/or other companies which were under the strewardship— or part stewardship— of Sir David Murray?

4. In some of the “Whyte” companies, Craig Thomas Whyte is stated to have a date of Birth of Jan 1969, but in others the date of Birth given for someone of the same name is stated to be Jan 1971?

5. Cortez has uncovered something odd about the address given for CW in the deed of purchase for the Caste– but exactly what that is remains unsaid at this time.

Is the above correct, and if so, is it an oversimplification of what we have learned thus far re these events?

Torquemada @6.14am
The one thing I’m certain about is the absurdity of the suggestion three pages ago by Veritas that Whyte and Murray are the smartest guys in the room and that they’ve left all the guys on this blog in the intellectual ha’penny place. Leaving myself totally out of it, I don’t think so

the Don Dionisio says:
12/12/2011 at 1:40 pm
I agree entirely about the absurdity of the suggestions by veritas and others, which you will note I dealt with, also 3 pages back.
……………………………………………
Torquemeda – you ‘aving a larf? You reckon I think Whyte and Murray are intellectuals? Now that really is absurd. Murray doesn’t even have pretensions to be an intellectual. In fact, he loathes them. As for Whyte, well nouveau riche, gauche, a rough diamond etc would all be descriptions that flatter his capacity for the finer things. He is clearly a vulgarian par excellence. However, both are street-smart and, as such, I’ll stand by my view that this drama has a long, long time to run before we even get close to the denouement.

Q Give us the names of a few of your companies that you’re really proud of?

A No. Good effort but I’m not going to name the companies because that’ll create a level of scrutiny for them and I don’t want to have that. I just want them to get on with business. Look, I can’t complain about it because I put myself in the position. David Murray told me what it would be like.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————
It’s just a pity that we don’t have the full details of everything else that David Murray said to him.

Im still not convinced their relationship is as simple as – buyer – seller

lurchingfrompillartopost says:
12/12/2011 at 4:53 pm
BillyBhoy68 on 12/12/2011 at 4:06 pm said:
Further checking indicates that all these addresses with SJO are
drop boxes for Costa Rica in Miami – SJO is airport code and the
number is the contract the client has with the mailing company
~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry didn’t see this. Good to know the old memory has some life in it yet 😀

Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
12/12/2011 at 4:59 pm
So let me see if I have this correct in so far as the last couple of days go:
…
4. In some of the “Whyte” companies, Craig Thomas Whyte is stated to have a date of Birth of Jan 1969, but in others the date of Birth given for someone of the same name is stated to be Jan 1971?
…
Is the above correct, and if so, is it an oversimplification of what we have learned thus far re these events?
=========================
Plus the spelling of his name: Companies House & Castle Grayskull II Planning Application refers to “White” as Colm Buddy mentioned the other day.

Stating the obvious here – but would there not be ‘severe’ penalties for anyone completing Companies House Documentation with incorrect information ? Would the MBB not have to sign a disclaimer confirming that “all the above information is correct.”?

Getting your name and date of birth wrong several times is rather careless, but easily done – happens to me all the time. :)!

Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
12/12/2011 at 4:59 pm
So let me see if I have this correct in so far as the last couple of days go:

4. In some of the “Whyte” companies, Craig Thomas Whyte is stated to have a date of Birth of Jan 1969, but in others the date of Birth given for someone of the same name is stated to be Jan 1971 ?

————————————————————————-

BRTH

The “interesting” thing about these 2 dates is as follows

There is another Craig Whyte, from Perth, who was born in 1969. On the same day as the Craig Whyte listed as a director of Vital UK and 15 other companies.

Craig Whyte of Vital and Craig Whyte of Rangers are the same person. This was admitted in the notice to Plus Markets.

The “other ” Craig Whyte, from Perth appears to have never been a company Director.

The question I have is how could Mr Rangers Craig Whyte have filled in multiple annual returns, for 16 seperate business’ , over a number of years, and ended up with the wrong date of birth on all of these return.

Co-incidently this date of birth on these returns is for someone completely unconnected , but who had the same name.

This Blog is like The Killing: the fantastic investigative work, the suspense, twists, turns and intrigue. Hope it ends in same way with bad guys getting done. I fear tho he is going to walk away wae a wad and Rankers will end up debt free and owned by someone who is sitting in the background currently licking his lips in anticipation.

I’m not sure if you’ve seen this before, but here is an article on FollowFollow from February this year which asks questions about the MBB. It also lists some of his business interests, but I think it is quite interesting that the questions were being asked on FF prior to his takeover, but they had subsequently been dropped after the takeover.

On that link Holmes was appointed a director in November 2005. The 2005 loan in the circular link allowed 2 directors to be appointed, was Whyte running the show at Merchant House whilst disqualified through these appointed directors?